In the United States, the term "social anarchism" is used by the
circle involved in publishing the Social Anarchism
journal and was promoted by Murray Bookchin. Bookchin identifies
social anarchism with the "left," by which he refers to the
"great tradition of human solidarity and a belief in the
potentiality for humanness," internationalism and confederalism, the democratic spirit, anti-militarism,
and rational secularism. Social anarchism aims for "free
association of people living together and cooperating in free
communities."[11]

Collectivist anarchism

Collectivist anarchism, also referred to as
revolutionary socialism or a form of such,[12][13] is a
revolutionary form of anarchism, commonly associated with Mikhail Bakunin
and Johann Most.[14][15] It is
a specific tendency, not to be confused with the broad category
sometimes called collectivist or communitarian
anarchism.[16]
Unlike mutualists, collectivist anarchists oppose all private
ownership of the means of production, instead advocating that
ownership be collectivized.

This was to be achieved through violent revolution, first
starting with a small cohesive group through acts of violence, or
"propaganda by the deed," which would
inspire the workers as a whole to revolt and forcibly collectivize
the means of production.[14]
However, collectivization was not to be extended to the
distribution of income, as workers would be paid according to time
worked, rather than receiving goods being distributed "according to
need" as in anarcho-communism. This position was
criticised by later anarcho-communists as effectively "uphold[ing]
the wages system".[17]

Anarchist communist and collectivist ideas were not mutually
exclusive; although the collectivist anarchists advocated
compensation for labor, some held out the possibility of a
post-revolutionary transition to a communist system of distribution
according to need.[18]
Collectivist anarchism arose contemporaneously with Marxism but opposed the Marxist
dictatorship of the
proletariat, despite the stated Marxist goal of a collectivist
stateless society.[19]

Anarcho-communist Peter Kropotkin believed that in anarchy, workers would
spontaneously self-organize to produce goods in common for all
society.

In anarchist communism, as money would be abolished, individuals
would not receive direct compensation for labour (through sharing
of profits or payment) but would have
free access to the resources and surplus of the commune.[22]
According to anarchist communist Peter Kropotkin and later Murray
Bookchin, the members of such a society would spontaneously
perform all necessary labour because they would recognize the
benefits of communal enterprise and mutual aid.[23]

Kropotkin believed that private property was one of the causes of oppression
and exploitation and called for its abolition,[24][25]
advocating instead common ownership.[24]
Kropotkin said that "houses, fields, and factories will no longer
be private property, and that they will belong to the commune or
the nation and money, wages, and trade would be abolished."[26]
Kropotkin's work Mutual Aid criticized social
Darwinism, arguing that cooperation is more natural than
competition. Conquest of Bread was essentially a handbook
on the organization of a society after the social
revolution.

In response to those criticizing Kropotkin for supporting
expropriation of homes and means of production from those who did
not wish to take part in anarcho-communism, he replied that if
someone did not want to join the commune they would be left alone
as long as they are a "peasant who is in possession of just the
amount of land he can cultivate," or "a family inhabiting a house
which affords them just enough space... considered necessary for
that number of people" or an artisan "working with their own tools
or handloom."[27]
arguing that "[t]he landlord owes his riches to the poverty of the
peasants, and the wealth of the capitalist comes from the same
source."[27]

The status of anarchist communism within anarchism is disputed,
because most individualist anarchists consider communitarianism incompatible with political
freedom.[28]
However, anarcho-communism does not always have a communitarian philosophy, Some forms of
anarchist communism are egoist,[29] and
are very influenced by radical individualist philosophy, believing
that anarcho-communism does not require a communitarian nature at
all. Anarchist communist Emma Goldman blended the philosophies of
both Max Stirner and Kropotkin in her own.[30]

Advertisements

Platformism

Platformism is an
anarchist communist tendency in the tradition of Nestor Makhno, who
argued for the "vital need of an organization which, having
attracted most of the participants in the anarchist movement, would
establish a common tactical and political line for anarchism and
thereby serve as a guide for the whole movement."[31]

Anarcho-syndicalism

In the early 20th century, anarcho-syndicalism arose as a
distinct school of thought within anarchism.[32] With
greater focus on the labour movement than previous forms of
anarchism, syndicalism posits radical trade unions as a
potential force for revolutionary social change, replacing
capitalism and the state with a new society, democratically self-managed by the
workers.

Its advocates propose labour organization as a means to create
the foundations of a trade union centered anarchist society within
the current system and bring about social revolution. An early
leading anarcho-syndicalist thinker was Rudolf Rocker, whose 1938 pamphlet
Anarchosyndicalism outlined a view of the movement's
origin, aims and importance to the future of labour.[33][34]

Contemporary currents

Inclusive
Democracy

Inclusive Democracy is a political theory and political project
that aim for direct democracy, economic
democracy in a stateless, moneyless and marketless
economy, self-management (democracy in the
social realm) and ecological democracy. The theoretical project of
Inclusive Democracy (ID; as
distinguished from the political project which is part of the
democratic and autonomy traditions) emerged from the work of
political philosopher, former academic and activist Takis
Fotopoulos in Towards An Inclusive Democracy and was
further developed by him and other writers in the journal Democracy & Nature and
its successor The International Journal of Inclusive
Democracy, an electronic journal freely available
and published by the International Network for Inclusive
Democracy.

According to Arran
Gare, Towards an Inclusive Democracy "offers a
powerful new interpretation of the history and destructive dynamics
of the market and provides an inspiring new vision of the future in
place of both neo-liberalism and existing forms of socialism" [35].
Also, as David Freeman points out, although Fotopoulos' approach
"is not openly anarchism, yet anarchism seems the formal category
within which he works, given his commitment to direct democracy,
municipalism and abolition of state, money and market economy".[36]

The underlying values that parecon seeks to implement are equity,
solidarity, diversity, workers' self-management and
efficiency. (Efficiency here means accomplishing goals without
wasting valued assets.) It proposes to attain these ends mainly
through the following principles and institutions:

Albert and Hahnel stress that parecon is only meant to address
an alternative economic theory and must be accompanied by equally
important alternative visions in the fields of politics, culture and kinship. The authors have also discussed
elements of anarchism in
the field of politics, polyculturalism in the field of
culture, and feminism in
the field of family and gender relations as being possible
foundations for future alternative visions in these other spheres
of society.

Social
ecology

It holds that present ecological
problems are rooted in deep-seated social problems,
particularly in dominatory hierarchical political
and social systems. These have resulted in an uncritical acceptance
of an overly competitive grow-or-die philosophy. It suggests that
this cannot be resisted by individual action such as ethical
consumerism but must be addressed by more nuanced ethical
thinking and collective activity grounded in radical
democratic ideals. The complexity of relationships between
people and with nature is
emphasised, along with the importance of establishing social
structures that take account of this.

^
Morris, Christopher W. 1998. An Essay on the Modern State.
Cambridge University Press. p 50. The collectivist
category is also sometimes known as social, socialist, or
communitarian anarchism category.

^Bakunin, Mikhail (1990). Statism
and Anarchy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521361826.
"They [the Marxists] maintain that only a dictatorship – their
dictatorship, of course – can create the will of the people,
while our answer to this is: No dictatorship can have any other aim
but that of self-perpetuation, and it can beget only slavery in the
people tolerating it; freedom can be created only by freedom, that
is, by a universal rebellion on the part of the people and free
organization of the toiling masses from the bottom up."

^
David Freeman, "Inclusive democracy and its
prospects" review of book Towards An Inclusive Democracy:
The Crisis of the Growth Economy and the Need For a New Liberatory
Project, published in Thesis Eleven, Sage
Publications, no. 69 (May 2002), pp. 103-106.

Socialist anarchism,[1][2][3][4]anarcho-socialism,[5]left-anarchism,[6]communitarian anarchism,[7] or social anarchism[8] (sometimes used interchangeably with libertarian socialism[1] or left-libertarianism[9] in its terminology) is an umbrella term used to differentiate two broad categories of anarchism, this one being the collectivist, with the other being individualist anarchism.[3][4] Where individualist forms of anarchism emphasize personal autonomy and the rational nature of human beings, socialist forms of anarchism sees "individual freedom as conceptually connected with social equality and emphasize community and mutual aid."[10] Unlike individualist anarchism, which stresses the importance of private property or ownership, socialist anarchism rejects private property, seeing it as a source of social inequality,[11] and posits a future society in which private property does not exist and is replaced by reciprocity and egalitarian society.[12][13] Socialist anarchism is used to specifically describe tendencies within anarchism that have an emphasis on the communitarian and cooperative aspects of anarchist theory and practice, and aims for "free association of people living together and cooperating in free communities."[14] Socialist anarchism includes (but is not limited to) anarcho-collectivism, anarcho-communism, anarcho-syndicalism and social ecology.

In the United States, the term "social anarchism" is used by the circle involved in publishing the Social Anarchism journal and has been promoted by the late Murray Bookchin.[9] Bookchin identifies social anarchism with the "left," by which he refers to the "great tradition of human solidarity and a belief in the potentiality for humanness," internationalism and confederalism, the democratic spirit, anti-militarism, and rational secularism.

Notes

I.^ Heider's work has been strongly criticised by anarchist academics including Bryan Caplan and Murray Bookchin for the allegedly poor quality of its research and presentation.[18][19]